上海大学学报(社会科学版)

• 法学研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

身份犯及其共犯的定罪与量刑 

张斌,张本勇   

  1. 1.上海电视大学  法律与行政学系,上海 200092;2.上海市高级人民法院,上海 200031
  • 出版日期:2012-01-15 发布日期:2012-01-15

Conviction and Sentencing of Status Crime and Its Accomplice

  1. 1.Department of Law, Shanghai Television College; 2.Shanghai Municipal Higher People' s Cout
  • Online:2012-01-15 Published:2012-01-15

摘要:  纯正身份犯与非纯正身份犯的划分、无身份者能否构成纯正身份犯的共犯、无身份者与身份者共犯以及不同身份共犯情况下的定罪量刑是身份犯研究的主要问题。司法实务对上述问题往往是选择重法,即无身份者均可成为身份犯的共犯、不同身份者共同犯罪按照主犯或按照重犯定罪和量刑,有重刑主义和司法擅断的特点。目前刑法学界多从已然角度去考察国外身份犯理论,并以我国刑法第382条或者相关司法解释为基础,审视身份犯的共犯问题。由此而得出的结论割裂了我国刑法中有关共犯问题的具体规定,也未充分关注国外无身份者按身份犯定罪后在量刑上的实质平衡,更不用说考察我国自唐代以来刑法中关于身份犯共犯的合理规定了。从应然的角度审视,可以得出如下结论:贪污罪不属于纯正身份犯;无身份者不能成为纯正身份犯共犯;除法律明文规定外,无身份者与非纯正身份犯共犯以及不同身份者共犯应各定其罪。

关键词:  , 纯正身份犯;非纯正身份犯;身份犯共犯;共犯从属性;主要实行行为;分别定罪

Abstract: The distinction between pure status crime and impure status crime, and the confirmation of the complicity by offenders without special status and pure status offenders are among the major issues of status crime research, which also focus on the conviction and punishment of jointoffense committed by offenders without special status, pure status offenders, and that of jointoffense by mixed status ones. The judicial practice home is opting to adopt severe penalty, confirming the complicity of offenders without special status in jointstatus offenses. It's also commonplace that offenses committed by mixed status offenders should be convicted and sentenced according to principal offenders or major offenders, suggesting severe sentence doctrine and judicial arbitrariness. Chinese criminal law circle investigate into international statuscrime theories from a whatis perspective. On the other hand, they probe into jointoffense in status crime in light of the 382 article of the Criminal Code and its legal interpretation. Conclusions drawn hence segregate stipulations of jointoffense in the Criminal Code. Nor can they suffice reference to the balanced rationale in sentencing after equalizing conviction of offenders without special status and status offenders in foreign judicial practice, let alone the ignorance of relevant rational traditional specifications passed down from Tang Dynasty. The present article, from a whatshouldbe perspective, argues that just as corruption offense does not fall into the category of pure status crime, nor do nonstatus offenders into the category of status offenders, and that nonstatus, impure status, and mixed status offenders should be convicted and sentenced separately except for express provision.

Key words: Key words: , pure status offenders, impure status offenders, the accomplice of status crime, subordination of accomplice, major offense behavior, separate conviction